View source for Geocentric model

{{Short description|Superseded description of the Universe with Earth at the center}}
{{Redirect| Geocentric|orbits around Earth|Geocentric orbit|the coordinate system|Geocentric coordinates}}
{{Use American English|date=January 2024}}
[[File:Bartolomeu Velho 1568.jpg|thumb|upright=1.35|''Figure of the heavenly bodies'' – An illustration of a Ptolemaic geocentric system by Portuguese cosmographer and cartographer [[Bartolomeu Velho]], 1568 (Bibliothèque Nationale, Paris)]]

In [[astronomy]], the '''geocentric model''' (also known as '''geocentrism''', often exemplified specifically by the '''Ptolemaic system''') is a [[superseded scientific theories|superseded]] description of the [[Universe]] with [[Earth]] at the center. Under most geocentric models, the [[Sun]], [[Moon]], [[star]]s, and [[classical planet|planets]] all [[orbit]] Earth. The geocentric model was the predominant description of the cosmos in many European [[Ancient history|ancient]] civilizations, such as those of [[Aristotle]] in Classical Greece and [[Ptolemy]] in Roman Egypt, as well as during the [[Islamic Golden Age]].

Two observations supported the idea that Earth was the center of the Universe. First, from anywhere on Earth, the Sun appears to revolve around Earth [[diurnal motion|once per day]]. While the Moon and the planets have their own motions, they also appear to revolve around Earth about once per day. The stars appeared to be [[fixed stars|fixed]] on a [[celestial sphere]] rotating once each day about [[celestial pole|an axis]] through the [[geographic pole]]s of Earth.{{sfn|Kuhn|1957|pp= 5–20}} Second, Earth seems to be unmoving from the perspective of an earthbound observer; it feels solid, stable, and stationary.

[[ancient Greece|Ancient Greek]], [[ancient Rome|ancient Roman]], and [[Middle Ages|medieval]] philosophers usually combined the geocentric model with a [[spherical Earth]], in contrast to the older [[flat Earth|flat-Earth]] model implied in some [[mythology]]. However, the Greek astronomer and mathematician [[Aristarchus of Samos]] ({{circa|310|230 BC}}) developed a [[heliocentric model]] placing all of the then-known planets in their correct order around the Sun. The ancient Greeks believed that the motions of the planets were [[circular orbit|circular]], a view that was not challenged in [[Western culture]] until the 17th century, when [[Johannes Kepler]] postulated that orbits were heliocentric and [[elliptic orbit|elliptical]] (Kepler's [[Kepler's laws of planetary motion#First law|first law of planetary motion]]). In 1687, [[Isaac Newton]] showed that elliptical orbits could be derived from his laws of gravitation.

The astronomical predictions of [[#Ptolemaic system|Ptolemy's geocentric model]], developed in the 2nd century of the Christian era, served as the basis for preparing [[astrology|astrological]] and [[star chart|astronomical charts]] for over 1,500 years. The geocentric model held sway into the [[early modern]] age, but from the late 16th century onward, it was gradually [[Superseded scientific theories#Superseded astronomical and cosmological theories|superseded]] by the heliocentric model of [[Copernicus]], [[Galileo Galilei|Galileo]], and [[Kepler]]. There was much resistance to the transition between these two theories, since for a long time the geocentric postulate produced more accurate results. Additionally some felt that a new, unknown theory could not subvert an accepted [[Scientific consensus|consensus]] for geocentrism.

==Ancient Greece==
[[File:Persectives of Anaximander's universe.png|thumb|upright=1.35|Illustration of Anaximander's models of the universe. On the left, summer; on the right, winter.]]

In the 6th century BC, [[Anaximander]] proposed a cosmology in which Earth is shaped like a section of a pillar (a cylinder), held aloft at the center of everything. The Sun, Moon, and planets were holes in invisible wheels which surround Earth, and through those holes, humans could see concealed fire. At around the same time, [[Pythagoras]] thought that Earth was a sphere (in accordance with observations of eclipses), but not at the center; he believed that it was in motion around an unseen fire. Later these two concepts were combined, so that most of the educated Greeks from the 4th century BC onwards thought that Earth was a sphere at the center of the universe.<ref name= "Fraser2006"/>

In the 4th century BC [[Plato]] and his student [[Aristotle]], wrote works based on the geocentric model{{cn|date=January 2025}}. According to Plato, the Earth was a sphere, stationary at the center of the universe. The stars and planets were carried around the Earth on [[Celestial spheres|spheres or circles]], arranged in the order (outwards from the center): Moon, Sun, Venus, Mercury, Mars, Jupiter, Saturn, fixed stars, with the fixed stars located on the celestial sphere. In his "[[Myth of Er]]", a section of the ''[[Republic (dialogue)|Republic]]'', Plato describes the cosmos as the [[Spindle of Necessity]], attended by the [[Siren (mythology)|Sirens]] and turned by the three [[Moirai|Fates]]. [[Eudoxus of Cnidus]], who worked with Plato, developed a less mythical, more mathematical explanation of the planets' motion based on Plato's [[dictum]] stating that all [[phenomena]] in the heavens can be explained with uniform circular motion. Aristotle elaborated on Eudoxus' system.

In the fully developed Aristotelian system, the spherical Earth is at the center of the universe, and all other heavenly bodies are attached to 47–55 transparent, rotating spheres surrounding the Earth, all concentric with it. (The number is so high because several spheres are needed for each planet.) These spheres, known as crystalline spheres, all moved at different uniform speeds to create the revolution of bodies around the Earth. They were composed of an incorruptible substance called [[Aether (classical element)|aether]]. Aristotle believed that the Moon was in the innermost sphere and therefore touches the realm of Earth, causing the dark spots ([[Macula (planetary geology)|maculae]]) and the ability to go through [[lunar phases]]. He further described his system by explaining the natural tendencies of the terrestrial elements: earth, water, fire, air, as well as celestial aether. His system held that earth was the heaviest element, with the strongest movement towards the center, thus water formed a layer surrounding the sphere of Earth. The tendency of air and fire, on the other hand, was to move upwards, away from the center, with fire being lighter than air. Beyond the layer of fire, were the solid spheres of aether in which the celestial bodies were embedded. They were also entirely composed of aether.

Adherence to the geocentric model stemmed largely from several important observations. First of all, if the Earth did move, then one ought to be able to observe the shifting of the fixed stars due to [[stellar parallax]]. Thus if the Earth was moving, the shapes of the [[constellation]]s should change considerably over the course of a year. As they did not appear to move, either the stars are much farther away than the Sun and the planets than previously conceived, making their motion undetectable, or the Earth is not moving at all. Because the stars are actually much further away than Greek astronomers postulated (making angular movement extremely small), [[stellar parallax#Early theory and attempts|stellar parallax]] was not detected [[stellar parallax#19th and 20th centuries|until the 19th century]]. Therefore, the Greeks chose the simpler of the two explanations. Another observation used in favor of the geocentric model at the time was the apparent consistency of Venus' luminosity, which implies that it is usually about the same distance from Earth, which in turn is more consistent with geocentrism than heliocentrism. (In fact, Venus' luminous consistency is due to any loss of light caused by its phases being compensated for by an increase in apparent size caused by its varying distance from Earth.) Objectors to heliocentrism noted that terrestrial bodies naturally tend to come to rest as near as possible to the center of the Earth. Further, barring the opportunity to fall closer the center, terrestrial bodies tend not to move unless forced by an outside object, or transformed to a different element by heat or moisture.

Atmospheric explanations for many phenomena were preferred because the Eudoxan–Aristotelian model based on perfectly concentric spheres was not intended to explain changes in the brightness of the planets due to a change in distance.<ref name= "Hetherington2006"/> Eventually, perfectly concentric spheres were abandoned as it was impossible to develop a sufficiently accurate model under that ideal, with the mathematical methods then available. However, while providing for similar explanations, the later [[deferent and epicycle]] model was already flexible enough to accommodate observations.

==Ptolemaic model==<!-- This section is linked from [[Giordano Bruno]] -->
[[File:Ptolemaic elements.svg|thumb|The basic elements of Ptolemaic astronomy, showing a planet on an [[epicycle]] with an eccentric deferent and an [[equant]] point. The Green shaded area is the celestial sphere which the planet occupies.]]

[[File:Ptolemaic Model.png|thumb|The Ptolemaic geocentric planetary model showing the epicycles of the planets and the Moon]]
Although the basic tenets of Greek geocentrism were established by the time of Aristotle, the details of his system did not become standard. The Ptolemaic system, developed by the [[Hellenization|Hellenistic]] astronomer [[Ptolemy|Claudius Ptolemaeus]] in the 2nd century AD, finally standardised geocentrism. His main astronomical work, the ''[[Almagest]]'', was the culmination of centuries of work by [[Ancient Greece|Hellenic]], [[Hellenistic civilization|Hellenistic]] and [[Babylonian astronomy|Babylonian]] astronomers. For over a millennium, European and [[Islamic astronomy|Islamic astronomers]] assumed it was the correct cosmological model. Because of its influence, people sometimes wrongly think the Ptolemaic system is identical with the '''geocentric model'''.

Ptolemy argued that the Earth was a sphere in the center of the universe, from the simple observation that half the stars were above the horizon and half were below the horizon at any time (stars on rotating stellar sphere), and the assumption that the stars were all at some modest distance from the center of the universe. If the Earth were substantially displaced from the center, this division into visible and invisible stars would not be equal.{{refn|group=n|This argument is given in Book I, Chapter 5, of the ''Almagest''.{{sfn|Crowe|1990|pp=60–62}}}}

===Ptolemaic system===
[[File:1550 SACROBOSCO Tractatus de Sphaera - (16) Ex Libris rare - Mario Taddei.JPG|left|thumb|Pages from 1550 ''Annotazione'' on Sacrobosco's ''[[De sphaera mundi]]'', showing the Ptolemaic system.]]
In the Ptolemaic system, each planet is moved by a system of two spheres: [[Deferent and epicycle|one called its deferent; the other, its epicycle]]. The deferent is a circle whose center point, called the eccentric and marked in the diagram with an X, is distant from the Earth. The original purpose of the eccentric was to account for the difference in length of the seasons (northern autumn was about five days shorter than spring during this time period) by placing the Earth away from the center of rotation of the rest of the universe. Another sphere, the epicycle, is embedded inside the deferent sphere and is represented by the smaller dotted line to the right. A given planet then moves around the epicycle at the same time the epicycle moves along the path marked by the deferent. These combined movements cause the given planet to move closer to and further away from the Earth at different points in its orbit, and explained the observation that planets slowed down, stopped, and moved backward in [[apparent retrograde motion|retrograde motion]], and then again reversed to resume normal, or prograde, motion.

The deferent-and-epicycle model had been used by Greek astronomers for centuries along with the idea of the eccentric (a deferent whose center is slightly away from the Earth), which was even older. In the illustration, the center of the deferent is not the Earth but the spot marked X, making it eccentric (from the [[Greek language|Greek]] ἐκ ''ec-'' meaning "from" and κέντρον ''kentron'' meaning "center"), from which the spot takes its name. Unfortunately, the system that was available in Ptolemy's time did not quite match [[observation]]s, even though it was an improvement over Hipparchus' system. Most noticeably the size of a planet's retrograde loop (especially that of Mars) would be smaller, or sometimes larger, than expected, resulting in positional errors of as much as 30 degrees. To alleviate the problem, Ptolemy developed the [[equant]]. The equant was a point near the center of a planet's orbit where, if you were to stand there and watch, the center of the planet's epicycle would always appear to move at uniform speed; all other locations would see non-uniform speed, as on the Earth. By using an equant, Ptolemy claimed to keep motion which was uniform and circular, although it departed from the Platonic ideal of [[uniform circular motion]]. The resultant system, which eventually came to be widely accepted in the west, seems unwieldy to modern astronomers; each planet required an epicycle revolving on a deferent, offset by an equant which was different for each planet. It predicted various celestial motions, including the beginning and end of retrograde motion, to within a maximum error of 10 degrees, considerably better than without the equant.

The model with epicycles is in fact a very good model of an elliptical orbit with low eccentricity. The well-known ellipse shape does not appear to a noticeable extent when the eccentricity is less than 5%, but the offset distance of the "center" (in fact the focus occupied by the Sun) is very noticeable even with low eccentricities as possessed by the planets.

To summarize, Ptolemy conceived a system that was compatible with Aristotelian philosophy and succeeded in tracking actual observations and predicting future movement mostly to within the limits of the next 1000 years of observations. The observed motions and his mechanisms for explaining them include:

{| class="wikitable"
 |+ The Ptolemaic system
 ! Object(s)
 ! Observation
 ! Modeling mechanism
 |-
 | Stars
 | Westward motion of entire sky in ~24 hrs ("first motion")
 | Stars: [[diurnal motion|Daily westward motion]] of [[celestial sphere|sphere of stars]], carrying all [[celestial spheres|other spheres]] with it; normally ignored; other spheres have additional motions
 |-
 | Sun
 | Eastward motion yearly along [[ecliptic]]
 | Eastward motion of Sun's sphere in one year
 |-
 | Sun
 | Non-uniform rate along ecliptic (uneven seasons)
 | Eccentric orbit (Sun's deferent center off Earth)
 |-
 | Moon
 | Monthly eastward motion compared to stars
 | Monthly eastward motion of Moon's sphere
 |-
 | The 5 planets
 | General eastward motion through [[zodiac]]
 | Eastward motion of deferents; period set by observation of planet going around the ecliptic
 |-
 | Planets
 | [[apparent retrograde motion|Retrograde motion]]
 | Motion of epicycle in same direction as deferent. Period of epicycle is time between retrograde motions ([[synodic period]]).
 |-
 | Planets
 | Variations in speed through the zodiac
 | Eccentric per planet
 |-
 | Planets
 | Variations in retrograde timing
 | Equants per planet (Copernicus used a pair of epicycles instead)
 |-
 | Planets
 | Size of deferents, epicycles
 | Only ratio between radius of deferent and associated epicycle determined; absolute distances not determined in theory
 |-
 | [[inferior planet|Interior planets]]
 | Average greatest [[Elongation (astronomy)|elongation]]s of 23° (Mercury) and 46° (Venus)
 | Size of epicycles set by these angles, proportional to distances
 |-
 | Interior planets
 | Limited to movement near the Sun
 | Center their deferent centers along the [[syzygy (astronomy)|Sun–Earth line]]
 |-
 | [[superior planet|Exterior planets]]
 | Retrograde only at [[opposition (astronomy)|opposition]], when brightest
 | Radii of epicycles aligned to the Sun–Earth line
 |}

The geocentric model was eventually replaced by the [[heliocentric model]]. [[Copernican heliocentrism]] could remove Ptolemy's epicycles because the retrograde motion could be seen to be the result of the combination of the movements and speeds of Earth and planets. Copernicus felt strongly that equants were a violation of Aristotelian purity, and proved that replacement of the equant with a pair of new epicycles was entirely equivalent. Astronomers often continued using the equants instead of the epicycles because the former was easier to calculate, and gave the same result.

It has been determined{{By whom|date=October 2019}} that the Copernican, Ptolemaic and even the [[Tychonic system|Tychonic]] models provide identical results to identical inputs: they are computationally equivalent. It was not until Kepler demonstrated a physical observation that could show that the physical Sun is directly involved in determining an orbit that a new model was required.

[[File:Ptolemaic system.svg|thumb|500px|[[Ptolemy]] thought the [[Solar System]] looked like this]]
The Ptolemaic order of spheres from Earth outward is:<ref name= "Goldstein1967"/>
# [[Moon]]
# [[Mercury (planet)|Mercury]]
# [[Venus]]
# [[Sun]]
# [[Mars]]
# [[Jupiter]]
# [[Saturn]]
# [[Fixed Stars]]
# ''[[Primum Mobile]]'' ("First Moved")

Ptolemy did not invent or work out this order, which aligns with the ancient [[Seven Heavens|Seven Heavens religious cosmology]] common to the major Eurasian religious traditions. It also follows the decreasing orbital periods of the Moon, Sun, planets and stars.

===Persian and Arab astronomy and geocentrism===
{{Main|Maragheh observatory|Astronomy in medieval Islam|Islamic cosmology}}
After the [[Graeco-Arabic translation movement|translation movement]] that included the translation of [[Almagest]] from Latin to Arabic, Muslims adopted and refined the geocentric model of [[Ptolemy]], which they believed correlated with the teachings of Islam.<ref name="princeton.edu">{{Cite web|url=https://www.princeton.edu/~hos/mike/texts/ptolemy/ptolemy.html|title = Ptolemaic Astronomy in the Middle Ages}}</ref><ref name="link.springer.com">{{Cite book|chapter-url=https://link.springer.com/referenceworkentry/10.1007%2F978-1-4020-4425-0_8988|doi=10.1007/978-1-4020-4425-0_8988|chapter=Almagest: Its Reception and Transmission in the Islamic World|title=Encyclopaedia of the History of Science, Technology, and Medicine in Non-Western Cultures|year=2008|last1=Kunitzsch|first1=Paul|pages=140–141|isbn=978-1-4020-4559-2}}</ref><ref name="astronomy.com">{{Cite web|url=https://astronomy.com/news/2017/02/muslim-contributions-to-astronomy|title = How Islamic scholarship birthed modern astronomy| date=14 February 2017 }}</ref> [[List of Muslim astronomers|Muslim astronomers]] generally accepted the Ptolemaic system and the geocentric model,<ref>{{cite journal | last1 = Sabra | first1 = A. I. | year = 1998 | title = Configuring the Universe: Aporetic, Problem Solving, and Kinematic Modeling as Themes of Arabic Astronomy | journal = [[Perspectives on Science]] | volume = 6 | issue = 3| pages = 288–330 [317–18] | doi = 10.1162/posc_a_00552 | s2cid = 117426616 }} {{blockquote|All Islamic astronomers from Thabit ibn Qurra in the ninth century to Ibn al-Shatir in the fourteenth, and all natural philosophers from al-Kindi to Averroes and later, are known to have accepted ... the Greek picture of the world as consisting of two spheres of which one, the celestial sphere ... concentrically envelops the other.}}</ref> but by the 10th century, texts appeared regularly whose subject matter expressed doubts concerning Ptolemy (''shukūk'').<ref>{{Cite book| publisher = Cambridge University Press| isbn = 9780521576000| last = Hoskin| first = Michael| title = The Cambridge Concise History of Astronomy| date = 1999-03-18|page=60}}</ref> Several Muslim scholars questioned Earth's apparent immobility<ref name= "Ragep2001a"/><ref name= "Ragep2001b"/> and centrality within the universe.<ref name=Setia2004 /> Some Muslim astronomers believed that [[Earth's rotation|Earth rotates around its axis]], such as [[Abu Sa'id al-Sijzi]] (d. circa 1020).<ref>{{Cite journal| volume = 108| issue = 67| pages = 762| last = Alessandro Bausani| title = Cosmology and Religion in Islam| journal = Scientia/Rivista di Scienza| date = 1973}}</ref><ref name=young /> According to [[al-Biruni]], Sijzi invented an [[astrolabe]] called ''al-zūraqī'', based upon a belief held by some of his contemporaries "that the motion we see is due to the Earth's movement and not to that of the sky".<ref name=young /><ref>{{Cite book| publisher = SUNY Press| isbn = 9781438414195| last = Nasr| first = Seyyed Hossein| title = An Introduction to Islamic Cosmological Doctrines| date = 1993-01-01|page=135}}</ref> The prevalence of this belief is further confirmed by a reference from the 13th century that states: <blockquote>According to the geometers [or engineers] (''muhandisīn''), the Earth is in constant circular motion, and what appears to be the motion of the heavens is actually due to the motion of the Earth and not the stars.<ref name=young>{{Cite book| publisher = Cambridge University Press| isbn = 9780521028875| editor-last1 = Young| editor-first1 = M. J. L.| title = Religion, Learning and Science in the 'Abbasid Period| date = 2006-11-02|page=413}}</ref></blockquote> Early in the 11th century, [[Alhazen]] wrote a scathing critique of [[Ptolemy]]'s model in his ''Doubts on Ptolemy'' ({{circa|1028}}), which some have interpreted to imply he was criticizing Ptolemy's geocentrism,{{sfn|Qadir|1989|p=5–10}} but most agree that he was actually criticizing the details of Ptolemy's model rather than his geocentrism.<ref>[http://setis.library.usyd.edu.au/stanford/entries/copernicus/index.html Nicolaus Copernicus], [[Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy]] (2004).</ref>
In the 12th century, [[Abū Ishāq Ibrāhīm al-Zarqālī|Arzachel]] departed from the ancient Greek idea of [[uniform circular motion]]s by hypothesizing that the planet [[Mercury (planet)|Mercury]] moves in an [[elliptic orbit]],<ref name= "Rufus1939"/><ref name= "Hartner1955"/> while [[Nur ad-Din al-Bitruji|Alpetragius]] proposed a planetary model that abandoned the [[equant]], [[Deferent and epicycle|epicycle and eccentric]] mechanisms,<ref name= "Goldstein1972"/> though this resulted in a system that was mathematically less accurate.<ref name= "Gale"/> His alternative system spread through most of Europe during the 13th century.<ref name=DSB>{{cite encyclopedia | last = Samsó | first = Julio | title =Al-Bitruji Al-Ishbili, Abu Ishaq| encyclopedia = [[Dictionary of Scientific Biography]] | publisher = Charles Scribner's Sons | location = New York | year=1970–80 | isbn = 0-684-10114-9 | url = http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1G2-2830904829.html}}</ref>

[[Fakhr al-Din al-Razi]] (1149–1209), in dealing with his [[Physics in medieval Islam|conception of physics]] and the physical world in his ''Matalib'', rejects the [[Aristotelianism|Aristotelian]] and [[Avicennism|Avicennian]] notion of the Earth's centrality within the universe, but instead argues that there are "a thousand thousand worlds (''alfa alfi 'awalim'') beyond this world, such that each one of those worlds be bigger and more massive than this world, as well as having the like of what this world has." To support his [[Islamic theology|theological argument]], he cites the [[Qur'an]]ic verse, "All praise belongs to God, Lord of the Worlds", emphasizing the term "Worlds".<ref name= "Setia2004"/>

The "Maragha Revolution" refers to the Maragha school's revolution against Ptolemaic astronomy. The "Maragha school" was an astronomical tradition beginning in the [[Maragheh observatory|Maragha observatory]] and continuing with astronomers from the [[Umayyad Mosque|Damascus mosque]] and [[Ulugh Beg Observatory|Samarkand observatory]]. Like their [[Al-Andalus|Andalusian]] predecessors, the Maragha astronomers attempted to solve the [[equant]] problem (the circle around whose circumference a planet or the center of an [[epicycle]] was conceived to move uniformly) and produce alternative configurations to the Ptolemaic model without abandoning geocentrism. They were more successful than their Andalusian predecessors in producing non-Ptolemaic configurations which eliminated the equant and eccentrics, were more accurate than the Ptolemaic model in numerically predicting planetary positions, and were in better agreement with empirical observations.<ref name= "Saliba1994"/> The most important of the Maragha astronomers included [[Mo'ayyeduddin Urdi]] (died 1266), [[Nasīr al-Dīn al-Tūsī]] (1201–1274), [[Qutb al-Din al-Shirazi]] (1236–1311), [[Ibn al-Shatir]] (1304–1375), [[Ali Qushji]] ({{circa|1474}}), [[Al-Birjandi]] (died 1525), and Shams al-Din al-Khafri (died 1550).<ref name= "Dallal1999"/>

However, the Maragha school never made the [[paradigm shift]] to heliocentrism.<ref name="Huff2003"/> The influence of the Maragha school on [[Copernicus]] remains speculative, since there is no documentary evidence to prove it. The possibility that Copernicus independently developed the Tusi couple remains open, since no researcher has yet demonstrated that he knew about Tusi's work or that of the Maragha school.<ref name="Huff2003" /><ref name="KirmaniSingh2005"/>

==Ptolemaic and rival systems==
{{too few opinions|date=June 2015}}<!--Missing [[Mu’ayyad al-Din al-’Urdi]] and [[Ibn al-Shatir]]-->
Not all Greeks agreed with the geocentric model. The [[Pythagoreanism|Pythagorean]] system has already been mentioned; some Pythagoreans believed the Earth to be one of several planets going around a central fire.<ref name= "JohansenRosenmeier1998"/> [[Hicetas]] and [[Ecphantus]], two Pythagoreans of the 5th century BC, and [[Heraclides Ponticus]] in the 4th century BC, believed that the Earth rotated on its axis but remained at the center of the universe.<ref name= "Sarton1953"/> Such a system still qualifies as geocentric. It was revived in the [[Middle Ages]] by [[Jean Buridan]]. Heraclides Ponticus was once thought to have proposed that both Venus and Mercury went around the Sun rather than the Earth, but it is now known that he did not.<ref name= "Eastwood1992"/> [[Martianus Capella]] definitely put Mercury and Venus in orbit around the Sun.<ref name="Lindberg2010"/> [[Aristarchus of Samos]] wrote a work, which has not survived, on [[heliocentrism]], saying that the Sun was at the center of the universe, while the Earth and other planets revolved around it.<ref name= "Lawson2004">{{cite book |last= Lawson |first= Russell M. |date= 2004 |title= Science in the Ancient World: An Encyclopedia |publisher= [[ABC-CLIO]] |isbn= 1851095349 |page=19}}</ref> His theory was not popular, and he had one named follower, [[Seleucus of Seleucia]].<ref name= "Russell1945"/>
[[Epicurus]] was the most radical. He correctly realized in the 4th century BC that the universe does not have any single center. This theory was widely accepted by the later Epicureans and was notably defended by [[Lucretius]] in his poem [[De rerum natura]].<ref>Line 1067 onwards.</ref>

===Copernican system===
{{Main|Copernican heliocentrism}}
In 1543, the geocentric system met its first serious challenge with the publication of [[Copernicus]]' ''[[De revolutionibus orbium coelestium]]'' (''On the Revolutions of the Heavenly Spheres''), which posited that the Earth and the other planets instead revolved around the Sun. The geocentric system was still held for many years afterwards, as at the time the Copernican system did not offer better predictions than the geocentric system, and it posed problems for both [[natural philosophy]] and scripture. The Copernican system was no more accurate than Ptolemy's system, because it still used circular orbits. This was not altered until [[Johannes Kepler]] postulated that they were elliptical (Kepler's [[Kepler's laws of planetary motion#First law|first law of planetary motion]]).

===Tychonic system===
{{Main|Tychonic system}}
[[Image:Tychonian system.svg|thumb|upright=1.2|In this depiction of the Tychonic system, the objects on blue orbits (the Moon and the Sun) revolve around the Earth. The objects on orange orbits (Mercury, Venus, Mars, Jupiter, and Saturn) revolve around the Sun. Around all is a sphere of stars, which rotates.]]
[[Tycho Brahe]] (1545-1601), made more accurate determinations of the positions of planets and stars. He sought the effect of stellar parallax, which would have been empirically verifiable proof of the Earth's motion around the Sun predicted by the Copernican model. Having observed no effect, he rejected the idea of the Earth's motion.{{sfnp|Kuhn|1957|pages=200–201}}  

Consequently, he introduced a new system, the Tychonic system, in which the Earth was still at the center of the universe, and around it revolved the Sun, but all the other planets revolved around the Sun in a set of epicycles. His model considered both the benefits of the Copernican model and the lack of evidence for the Earth's motion.{{sfnp|Kuhn|1957|pages=201–206}}

===Observation by Galileo and abandonment of the Ptolemaic model===
With the invention of the [[telescope]] in 1609, observations made by [[Galileo Galilei]] (such as that [[Jupiter]] has moons) called into question some of the tenets of geocentrism but did not seriously threaten it. Because he observed dark "spots" on the Moon, craters, he remarked that the moon was not a perfect celestial body as had been previously conceived. This was the first detailed observation by telescope of the Moon's imperfections, which had previously been explained by Aristotle as the Moon being [[Contamination|contaminated]] by Earth and its heavier elements, in contrast to the [[aether (classical element)|aether]] of the higher spheres. Galileo could also see the moons of Jupiter, which he dedicated to [[Cosimo II de' Medici, Grand Duke of Tuscany|Cosimo II de' Medici]], and stated that they orbited around Jupiter, not Earth.<ref name= "Finocchiaro2008"/> This was a significant claim as it would mean not only that not everything revolved around Earth as stated in the Ptolemaic model, but also showed a secondary celestial body could orbit a moving celestial body, strengthening the heliocentric argument that a moving Earth could retain the Moon.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.atnf.csiro.au/outreach/education/senior/astrophysics/galileo.html|title=Galileo and the Telescope|work=Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation|access-date=17 October 2014}}</ref> Galileo's observations were verified by other astronomers of the time period who quickly adopted use of the telescope, including [[Christoph Scheiner]], [[Johannes Kepler]], and Giovan Paulo Lembo.<ref>Lattis, James L. (1995). Between Copernicus and Galileo: Christoph Clavius and the Collapse of Ptolemaic Cosmology, University of Chicago Press, pgs 186-190</ref>

{{multiple image
|footer=In 1610 [[Galileo Galilei]] observed with his telescope that [[Phases of Venus|Venus showed phases]], despite remaining near the Sun in Earth's sky (first image). This proved that it orbits the [[Sun]] and not [[Earth]], as predicted by [[Copernican heliocentrism|Copernican]] and [[Tychonic system|Tychonic]] models, and disproved the Ptolemaic one (second image). 
|align=right
|image1 = Phases-of-Venus2.svg|
|image2 = Phases-of-Venus-Geocentric.svg|}}
In December 1610, [[Galileo Galilei]] used his telescope to observe that [[Venus]] showed all [[Phases of Venus|phases]], just [[lunar phase|like the Moon]]. He thought that while this observation was incompatible with the Ptolemaic system, it was a natural consequence of the heliocentric system.

However, Ptolemy placed Venus' [[deferent]] and [[epicycle]] entirely inside the sphere of the Sun (between the Sun and Mercury), but this was arbitrary; he could just as easily have swapped Venus and Mercury and put them on the other side of the Sun, or made any other arrangement of Venus and Mercury, as long as they were always near a line running from the Earth through the Sun, such as placing the center of the Venus epicycle near the Sun. In this case, if the Sun is the source of all the light, under the Ptolemaic system:
{{Blockquote|If Venus is between Earth and the Sun, the phase of Venus must always be [[crescent]] or all dark.

If Venus is beyond the Sun, the phase of Venus must always be [[gibbous]] or full.}}
But Galileo saw Venus at first small and full, and later large and crescent.
This showed that with a Ptolemaic cosmology, the Venus epicycle can be neither completely inside nor completely outside of the orbit of the Sun. As a result, Ptolemaics abandoned the idea that the epicycle of Venus was completely inside the Sun, and later 17th-century competition between astronomical cosmologies focused on variations of the Tychonic or Copernican systems.
===Historical positions of the Roman Catholic hierarchy===
The famous [[Galileo affair]] pitted the geocentric model against the claims of [[Galileo]]. In regards to the theological basis for such an argument, two Popes addressed the question of whether the use of phenomenological language would compel one to admit an error in Scripture. Both taught that it would not. [[Pope Leo XIII]] wrote:
{{Blockquote|we have to contend against those who, making an evil use of physical science, minutely scrutinize the Sacred Book in order to detect the writers in a mistake, and to take occasion to vilify its contents. ... There can never, indeed, be any real discrepancy between the theologian and the physicist, as long as each confines himself within his own lines, and both are careful, as St. Augustine warns us, "not to make rash assertions, or to assert what is not known as known". If dissension should arise between them, here is the rule also laid down by St. Augustine, for the theologian: "Whatever they can really demonstrate to be true of physical nature, we must show to be capable of reconciliation with our Scriptures; and whatever they assert in their treatises which is contrary to these Scriptures of ours, that is to Catholic faith, we must either prove it as well as we can to be entirely false, or at all events we must, without the smallest hesitation, believe it to be so." To understand how just is the rule here formulated we must remember, first, that the sacred writers, or to speak more accurately, the Holy Ghost "Who spoke by them, did not intend to teach men these things (that is to say, the essential nature of the things of the visible universe), things in no way profitable unto salvation." Hence they did not seek to penetrate the secrets of nature, but rather described and dealt with things in more or less figurative language, or in terms which were commonly used at the time, and which in many instances are in daily use at this day, even by the most eminent men of science. Ordinary speech primarily and properly describes what comes under the senses; and somewhat in the same way the sacred writers-as the Angelic Doctor also reminds us – "went by what sensibly appeared", or put down what God, speaking to men, signified, in the way men could understand and were accustomed to.|[[Providentissimus Deus]] 18}}

Maurice Finocchiaro, author of a book on the Galileo affair, notes that this is "a view of the relationship between biblical interpretation and scientific investigation that corresponds to the one advanced by Galileo in the "[[Letter to the Grand Duchess Christina]]".<ref name="Finocchiaro1989"/> [[Pope Pius XII]] repeated his predecessor's teaching:
{{Blockquote|The first and greatest care of Leo XIII was to set forth the teaching on the truth of the Sacred Books and to defend it from attack. Hence with grave words did he proclaim that there is no error whatsoever if the sacred writer, speaking of things of the physical order "went by what sensibly appeared" as the Angelic Doctor says, speaking either "in figurative language, or in terms which were commonly used at the time, and which in many instances are in daily use at this day, even among the most eminent men of science". For "the sacred writers, or to speak more accurately – the words are St. Augustine's – the Holy Spirit, Who spoke by them, did not intend to teach men these things – that is the essential nature of the things of the universe – things in no way profitable to salvation"; which principle "will apply to cognate sciences, and especially to history", that is, by refuting, "in a somewhat similar way the fallacies of the adversaries and defending the historical truth of Sacred Scripture from their attacks".|''[[Divino afflante Spiritu]]'', 3}}

In 1664, [[Pope Alexander VII]] republished the ''[[Index Librorum Prohibitorum]]'' (''List of Prohibited Books'') and attached the various decrees connected with those books, including those concerned with heliocentrism. He stated in a [[papal bull]] that his purpose in doing so was that "the succession of things done from the beginning might be made known [''quo rei ab initio gestae series innotescat'']".<ref name= "Alexandri VII1664"/>

The position of the curia evolved slowly over the centuries towards permitting the heliocentric view. In 1757, during the papacy of Benedict XIV, the Congregation of the Index withdrew the decree that prohibited ''all'' books teaching the Earth's motion, although the ''Dialogue'' and a few other books continued to be explicitly included. In 1820, the Congregation of the Holy Office, with the pope's approval, decreed that Catholic astronomer [[Giuseppe Settele]] was allowed to treat the Earth's motion as an established fact and removed any obstacle for Catholics to hold to the motion of the Earth:
{{Blockquote|The Assessor of the Holy Office has referred the request of Giuseppe Settele, Professor of Optics and Astronomy at La Sapienza University, regarding permission to publish his work Elements of Astronomy in which he espouses the common opinion of the astronomers of our time regarding the Earth’s daily and yearly motions, to His Holiness through Divine Providence, Pope Pius VII. Previously, His Holiness had referred this request to the Supreme Sacred Congregation and concurrently to the consideration of the Most Eminent and Most Reverend General Cardinal Inquisitor. His Holiness has decreed that no obstacles exist for those who sustain Copernicus' affirmation regarding the Earth's movement in the manner in which it is affirmed today, even by Catholic authors. He has, moreover, suggested the insertion of several notations into this work, aimed at demonstrating that the above mentioned affirmation [of Copernicus], as it has come to be understood, does not present any difficulties; difficulties that existed in times past, prior to the subsequent astronomical observations that have now occurred. [Pope Pius VII] has also recommended that the implementation [of these decisions] be given to the Cardinal Secretary of the Supreme Sacred Congregation and Master of the Sacred Apostolic Palace. He is now appointed the task of bringing to an end any concerns and criticisms regarding the printing of this book, and, at the same time, ensuring that in the future, regarding the publication of such works, permission is sought from the Cardinal Vicar whose signature will not be given without the authorization of the Superior of his Order.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://inters.org/approval-Settele-heliocentric|title=Decree of Approval for the Work "Elements of Astronomy" by Giuseppe Settele, in support of the Heliocentric System &#124; Inters.org|website=inters.org}}</ref>}}

In 1822, the Congregation of the Holy Office removed the prohibition on the publication of books treating of the Earth's motion in accordance with modern astronomy and Pope Pius VII ratified the decision:
{{Blockquote|The most excellent [cardinals] have decreed that there must be no denial, by the present or by future Masters of the Sacred Apostolic Palace, of permission to print and to publish works which treat of the mobility of the Earth and of the immobility of the sun, according to the common opinion of modern astronomers, as long as there are no other contrary indications, on the basis of the decrees of the Sacred Congregation of the Index of 1757 and of this Supreme [Holy Office] of 1820; and that those who would show themselves to be reluctant or would disobey, should be forced under punishments at the choice of [this] Sacred Congregation, with derogation of [their] claimed privileges, where necessary.<ref>{{cite book|last=Fantoli|first=Annibale|title=Galileo: For Copernicanism and For the Church|date=1996|publisher=University of Notre Dame|isbn=0268010323|page=475}}</ref>}}

The 1835 edition of the Catholic ''List of Prohibited Books'' for the first time omits the ''Dialogue'' from the list.<ref name="Finocchiaro1989"/> In his 1921 [[papal encyclical]], ''[[In praeclara summorum]]'', [[Pope Benedict XV]] stated that, "though this Earth on which we live may not be the center of the universe as at one time was thought, it was the scene of the original happiness of our first ancestors, witness of their unhappy fall, as too of the Redemption of mankind through the Passion and Death of Jesus Christ".<ref name= "BenedictXV1921"/> In 1965 the [[Second Vatican Council]] stated that, "Consequently, we cannot but deplore certain habits of mind, which are sometimes found too among Christians, which do not sufficiently attend to the rightful independence of science and which, from the arguments and controversies they spark, lead many minds to conclude that faith and science are mutually opposed."<ref name= "PaulIV19665"/> The footnote on this statement is to Msgr. Pio Paschini's, ''Vita e opere di Galileo Galilei'', 2 volumes, Vatican Press (1964). [[Pope John Paul II]] regretted the treatment that Galileo received, in a speech to the [[Pontifical Academy of Sciences]] in 1992. The Pope declared the incident to be based on a "tragic mutual miscomprehension". He further stated:
{{Blockquote|Cardinal Poupard has also reminded us that the sentence of 1633 was not irreformable, and that the debate which had not ceased to evolve thereafter, was closed in 1820 with the imprimatur given to the work of Canon Settele. ... The error of the theologians of the time, when they maintained the centrality of the Earth, was to think that our understanding of the physical world's structure was, in some way, imposed by the literal sense of Sacred Scripture. Let us recall the celebrated saying attributed to Baronius "Spiritui Sancto mentem fuisse nos docere quomodo ad coelum eatur, non quomodo coelum gradiatur". In fact, the Bible does not concern itself with the details of the physical world, the understanding of which is the competence of human experience and reasoning. There exist two realms of knowledge, one which has its source in Revelation and one which reason can discover by its own power. To the latter belong especially the experimental sciences and philosophy. The distinction between the two realms of knowledge ought not to be understood as opposition.<ref name= "John PaulII1992"/>}}
==Gravitation==

[[Johannes Kepler]] analysed [[Tycho Brahe]]'s famously accurate observations, and afterwards constructed his [[Kepler's laws of planetary motion|three laws]] in 1609 and 1619, based upon a heliocentric model wherein the planets move in elliptical paths. Using these laws, he was the first astronomer to successfully predict a [[transit of Venus]] for the year 1631. The change from circular orbits to elliptical planetary paths dramatically improved the accuracy of celestial observations and predictions. Because the heliocentric model devised by Copernicus was no more accurate than Ptolemy's system, new observations were needed to persuade those who still adhered to the geocentric model. However, Kepler's laws based upon Brahe's data became a problem that geocentrists could not easily overcome.

In 1687, [[Isaac Newton]] stated the [[law of universal gravitation]], which was described earlier as a hypothesis by [[Robert Hooke]] and others. His main achievement was to mathematically derive [[Kepler's laws of planetary motion]] from the law of gravitation, thus helping to prove the latter. This introduced [[gravitation]] as the force which kept Earth and the planets moving through the universe, and also kept the atmosphere from flying away. The theory of gravity allowed scientists to rapidly construct a plausible heliocentric model for the [[Solar System]]. In his ''[[Philosophiæ Naturalis Principia Mathematica|Principia]]'', Newton explained his theory of how gravity, previously thought to be a mysterious, unexplained occult force, directed the movements of celestial bodies, and kept the Solar System in working order. His descriptions of [[centripetal force]]<ref name= "Densmore2004"/> were a breakthrough in scientific thought, using the newly developed mathematical discipline of [[differential calculus]], finally replacing the previous schools of scientific thought, which had been dominated by Aristotle and Ptolemy. However, the process was gradual.

Several [[Earth's rotation#Empirical tests|empirical tests]] of Newton's theory, explaining the longer period of oscillation of a pendulum at the equator and the differing size of a degree of latitude, would gradually become available between 1673 and 1738. In addition, [[stellar aberration]] was observed by [[Robert Hooke]] in 1674, and tested in a series of observations by [[Jean Picard]] over a period of ten years, finishing in 1680. However, it was not explained until 1729, when [[James Bradley]] provided an approximate explanation in terms of the Earth's revolution about the Sun.

In 1838, astronomer [[Friedrich Wilhelm Bessel]] measured the [[parallax]] of the star [[61 Cygni]] successfully, and disproved Ptolemy's claim that parallax motion did not exist. This finally confirmed the assumptions made by Copernicus, providing accurate, dependable scientific observations, and conclusively displaying how distant stars are from Earth.

A geocentric frame is useful for many everyday activities and most laboratory experiments, but is a less appropriate choice for Solar System mechanics and space travel. While a [[Heliocentrism|heliocentric frame]] is most useful in those cases, galactic and extragalactic astronomy is easier if the Sun is treated as neither stationary nor the center of the universe, but rather rotating around the center of the Milky Way galaxy, while in turn the Milky Way is also not at rest in the [[Cosmic Microwave Background#Velocity relative to CMB anisotropy|cosmic background]].

==Relativity==
[[Albert Einstein]] and [[Leopold Infeld]] wrote in ''The Evolution of Physics'' (1938): "Can we formulate physical laws so that they are valid for all CS &#91;[[coordinate system]]s&#93;, not only those moving uniformly, but also those moving quite arbitrarily, relative to each other? If this can be done, our difficulties will be over. We shall then be able to apply the laws of nature to any CS. The struggle, so violent in the early days of science, between the views of Ptolemy and Copernicus would then be quite meaningless. Either CS could be used with equal justification. The two sentences, 'the sun is at rest and the Earth moves', or 'the sun moves and the Earth is at rest', would simply mean two different conventions concerning two different CS.
Could we build a real relativistic physics valid in all CS; a physics in which there would be no place for absolute, but only for relative, motion? This is indeed possible!"<ref>{{cite book| last1=Einstein|first1=Albert|title=The Evolution of Physics|date=1938| publisher=Simon & Schuster| location=New York|isbn=0-671-20156-5|page=[https://archive.org/details/evolutionofphysi00eins/page/212 212]| edition=1966| url=https://archive.org/details/evolutionofphysi00eins/page/212}}</ref>

Despite giving more respectability to the geocentric view than Newtonian physics does,<ref>{{cite book|last1=Hoyle|first1=Fred|title=Nicolaus Copernicus: An Essay On His Life and Work|date=1973|publisher=Harper and Row|location=New York|isbn=0-06-011971-3|page=87}}</ref> relativity is not geocentric. Rather, relativity states that the Sun, the Earth, the Moon, Jupiter, or any other point for that matter could be chosen as a center of the Solar System with equal validity.<ref>{{cite book|last1=Hoyle|first1=Fred|title=Nicolaus Copernicus: An Essay On His Life and Work|date=1973|publisher=Heineman Educational Books Ltd.|location=London|isbn=0-435-54425-X|page=1}}</ref>

Relativity agrees with Newtonian predictions that regardless of whether the Sun or the Earth are chosen arbitrarily as the center of the coordinate system describing the Solar System, the paths of the planets form (roughly) ellipses with respect to the Sun, not the Earth. With respect to the average [[Frame of reference|reference frame]] of the [[fixed stars]], the planets do indeed move around the Sun, which due to its much larger mass, moves far less than its own diameter and the gravity of which is dominant in determining the orbits of the planets (in other words, the center of mass of the Solar System is near the center of the Sun). The Earth and Moon are much closer to being a [[binary planet]]; the center of mass around which they both rotate is still inside the Earth, but is about {{convert|4624|km|mile|abbr=on}} or 72.6% of the Earth's radius away from the centre of the Earth (thus closer to the surface than the center).{{citation needed|date=July 2017}}

What the principle of relativity points out is that correct mathematical calculations can be made regardless of the reference frame chosen, and these will all agree with each other as to the predictions of actual motions of bodies with respect to each other. It is not necessary to choose the object in the Solar System with the largest gravitational field as the center of the coordinate system in order to predict the motions of planetary bodies, though doing so may make calculations easier to perform or interpret. A [[geocentric coordinate system]] can be more convenient when dealing only with bodies mostly influenced by the gravity of the Earth (such as [[artificial satellite]]s and the [[Moon]]), or when calculating what the sky will look like when viewed from Earth (as opposed to an imaginary observer looking down on the entire Solar System, where a different coordinate system might be more convenient).{{Citation needed|date=July 2023}}

==Religious and contemporary adherence to geocentrism==
{{see also|Geocentric creationism}}The [[Ptolemaic model]] held sway into the early [[modern age]]; from the late 16th century onward it was gradually replaced as the consensus description by the [[heliocentric model]]. Geocentrism as a separate religious belief, however, never completely died out. In the [[United States]] between 1870 and 1920, for example, various members of the [[Lutheran Church–Missouri Synod]] published articles disparaging [[Copernican heliocentrism|Copernican astronomy]] and promoting geocentrism.<ref name= "Babinski1995"/> However, in the 1902 ''Theological Quarterly'', A. L. Graebner observed that the synod had no doctrinal position on geocentrism, heliocentrism, or any scientific model, unless it were to contradict Scripture. He stated that any possible declarations of geocentrists within the synod did not set the position of the church body as a whole.<ref name= "Graebner1902"/>

Articles arguing that geocentrism was the biblical perspective appeared in some early [[creation science]] newsletters.{{which|date=June 2023}} Contemporary advocates for such [[religious belief]]s include [[Robert Sungenis]] (author of the 2006 book ''Galileo Was Wrong'' and the 2014 pseudo-documentary film ''[[The Principle]]'').<ref name= "Sefton2006"/> Most contemporary [[creationist]] organizations reject such perspectives.{{refn|group=n|Donald B. DeYoung, for example, states that "Similar terminology is often used today when we speak of the sun's rising and setting, even though the earth, not the sun, is doing the moving. Bible writers used the 'language of appearance', just as people always have. Without it, the intended message would be awkward at best and probably not understood clearly. When the Bible touches on scientific subjects, it is entirely accurate."<ref>{{cite web |last= DeYoung |first= Donald B. |date= 1997-11-05 |title= Astronomy and the Bible: Selected questions and answers excerpted from the book |url=http://www.answersingenesis.org/Docs/399.asp |access-date= 2013-12-01 |publisher= Answers in Genesis}}</ref>}} A few [[Orthodox Judaism|Orthodox Jewish]] leaders maintain a geocentric model of the universe and an interpretation of [[Maimonides]] to the effect that he ruled that the Earth is orbited by the Sun.<ref name="Nussbaum2007"/><ref name= "Nussbaum2002"/> The [[Lubavitcher Rebbe]] also explained that geocentrism is defensible based on the [[Galilean invariance|theory of relativity]].<ref name="SchneersohnGotfryd2003"/> While geocentrism is important in Maimonides' calendar calculations,<ref name= "Mishneh Torah"/> the great majority of Jewish religious scholars, who accept the divinity of the Bible and accept many of his rulings as legally binding, do not believe that the Bible or Maimonides command a belief in geocentrism.<ref name="Nussbaum2002" /><ref name= "Rabinowitz1987"/> There have been some modern Islamic scholars who promoted geocentrism. One of them was [[Ahmed Raza Khan Barelvi]], a [[Sunni]] scholar of the [[Indian subcontinent]]. He rejected the heliocentric model and wrote a book<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.alahazratnetwork.org/modules/booksofalahazrat/item.php?page=0&itemid=216|title=Fauz e Mubeen Dar Radd e Harkat e Zamin|access-date=2014-04-16|archive-date=2014-04-16|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140416192837/http://www.alahazratnetwork.org/modules/booksofalahazrat/item.php?page=0&itemid=216|url-status=dead}}</ref> that explains the movement of the sun, moon and other planets around the Earth.

According to a report released in 2014 by the [[National Science Foundation]], 26% of Americans surveyed believe that the Sun revolves around the Earth.<ref name="NSF2014" /> [[Morris Berman]] quotes a 2006 survey that show currently some 20% of the U.S. population believe that the Sun goes around the Earth (geocentricism) rather than the Earth goes around the Sun (heliocentricism), while a further 9% claimed not to know.<ref name= "Berman2006"/> Polls conducted by [[The Gallup Organization|Gallup]] in the 1990s found that 16% of Germans, 18% of Americans and 19% of Britons hold that the Sun revolves around the Earth.<ref name= "Crabtree1999"/> A study conducted in 2005 by [[Jon D. Miller]] of [[Northwestern University]], an expert in the public understanding of science and technology,<ref name= "MillerBio"/> found that about 20%, or one in five, of American adults believe that the Sun orbits the Earth.<ref name= "Dean2005"/> According to 2011 [[VTSIOM]] poll, 32% of [[Russians]] believe that the Sun orbits the Earth.<ref name= "RussianStudy2011"/>

==Planetariums==
Many [[planetariums]] can switch between [[heliocentric]] and geocentric models.<ref name="Hort1822" /><ref>{{cite journal |last1=Raposo |first1=Pedro |title=Recounting the Orbs |journal=Nuncius |date=2020 |volume=35 |issue=2 |pages=274–299 |doi=10.1163/18253911-03502005 |s2cid=225198696 |url=https://brill.com/view/journals/nun/35/2/article-p274_5.xml|url-access=subscription }}</ref> In particular, the geocentric model is still used for projecting the [[celestial sphere]] and [[lunar phases]] in education<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Chastenay |first1=Pierre |title=From Geocentrism to Allocentrism: Teaching the Phases of the Moon in a Digital Full-Dome Planetarium |journal=Research in Science Education |date=2016 |volume=46 |issue=1 |page=43 |doi=10.1007/s11165-015-9460-3 |bibcode=2016RScEd..46...43C |s2cid=254983499 |doi-access=free }}</ref> and sometimes for navigation.

==See also==
* [[Aristotelian physics]]
* [[Earth-centered, Earth-fixed coordinate system]]
* [[History of the center of the Universe]]
* {{slink|Hollow Earth|Concave Hollow Earths}}
* [[Religious cosmology]]
* [[Sphere of fire]]
* [[Wolfgang Smith]], Catholic mathematician

==Notes==
{{Reflist|group=n|60em}}

==References==
{{Reflist|30em|refs=
<ref name= "Fraser2006">{{cite book |last= Fraser |first= Craig G. |title= The Cosmos: A Historical Perspective |url= https://archive.org/details/cosmoshistorical00fras |url-access= limited |date= 2006 |page= [https://archive.org/details/cosmoshistorical00fras/page/n26 14]|publisher= Bloomsbury Academic |isbn= 9780313332180 }}</ref>
<ref name= "Hetherington2006">{{cite book |last= Hetherington |first= Norriss S. |title= Planetary Motions: A Historical Perspective |url= https://archive.org/details/planetarymotions00heth |url-access= limited |date= 2006 |page= [https://archive.org/details/planetarymotions00heth/page/n44 28]|publisher= Bloomsbury Academic |isbn= 9780313332418 }}</ref>
<ref name= "Goldstein1967">{{cite journal |title= The Arabic version of Ptolemy's planetary hypothesis |first= Bernard R. |last= Goldstein |page= 6 |journal= Transactions of the American Philosophical Society |date= 1967 |volume= 57 |issue= pt. 4 |doi= 10.2307/1006040 |jstor= 1006040}}</ref>
<ref name= "Rufus1939">{{cite magazine |title= The influence of Islamic astronomy in Europe and the far east |last= Rufus |first= W. C. |magazine= Popular Astronomy |volume= 47 |issue= 5 |date=May 1939 |pages= 233–8|bibcode = 1939PA.....47..233R }}</ref>
<ref name= "Hartner1955">{{cite journal |first= Willy |last= Hartner |title= The Mercury horoscope of Marcantonio Michiel of Venice |journal= Vistas in Astronomy |volume= 1 |date= 1955 |issue= 1 |pages= 118–22 |doi=10.1016/0083-6656(55)90016-7|bibcode = 1955VA......1...84H }}</ref>
<ref name= "Goldstein1972">{{cite journal |first= Bernard R. |last= Goldstein |date= 1972 |title= Theory and observation in medieval astronomy |journal= Isis |volume= 63 |issue= 1 |page= 41 |doi=10.1086/350839|bibcode= 1972Isis...63...39G |s2cid= 120700705 }}</ref>
<ref name= "Gale">{{Cite book |chapter= Ptolemaic Astronomy, Islamic Planetary Theory, and Copernicus's Debt to the Maragha School |title= Science and Its Times |publisher= [[Thomson Gale]] |date= 2006}}</ref>
<ref name= "Setia2004">{{Cite journal |title= Fakhr Al-Din Al-Razi on physics and the nature of the physical world: A preliminary survey |first= Adi |last= Setia |journal= Islam & Science |volume= 2 |date= 2004|url=https://cis-ca.org/_media/pdf/2004/2/A_faaopatnotpwaps.pdf}}</ref>
<ref name= "Saliba1994">{{cite book |last= Saliba |first= George |author-link= George Saliba |date= 1994 |title= A History of Arabic Astronomy: Planetary Theories During the Golden Age of Islam |pages= 233–234, 240 |publisher= [[New York University Press]] |isbn= 0814780237}}</ref>
<ref name= "Dallal1999">{{cite book |first= Ahmad |last= Dallal |date= 1999 |chapter= Science, Medicine and Technology |title= The Oxford History of Islam |url= https://archive.org/details/oxfordhistoryisl00espo |url-access= limited |page=  [https://archive.org/details/oxfordhistoryisl00espo/page/n183 171] |editor-first= John |editor-last= Esposito |editor-link= John Esposito |location= New York |publisher= [[Oxford University Press]]|isbn= 978-0-19-510799-9 }}</ref>
<!--
<ref name= "Guessoun2008">{{cite journal |last= Guessoum |first= N. |date=June 2008 |title= Copernicus and Ibn Al-Shatir: Does the Copernican revolution have Islamic roots? |journal= The Observatory |volume= 128 |pages= 231–9|bibcode = 2008Obs...128..231G }}</ref>
-->
<ref name= "Ragep2001a">{{Cite journal |last= Ragep |first= F. Jamil |date= 2001 |title= Tusi and Copernicus: The Earth's motion in context |journal= Science in Context |volume= 14 |issue= 1–2 |pages= 145–163 |publisher= [[Cambridge University Press]] |doi=10.1017/s0269889701000060|s2cid= 145372613 }}</ref>
<ref name= "Ragep2001b">{{Cite journal |last= Ragep |first= F. Jamil |date= 2001 |title= Freeing astronomy from philosophy: An aspect of Islamic influence on science |journal= Osiris |series= 2nd Series |volume= 16 |issue= Science in Theistic Contexts: Cognitive Dimensions |pages= 49–64, 66–71 |doi=10.1086/649338|url= http://digitool.Library.McGill.CA:80/R/?func=dbin-jump-full&object_id=156332 |bibcode= 2001Osir...16...49R |s2cid= 142586786 }}</ref>
<ref name="Huff2003">{{cite book |last= Huff |first= Toby E. |title= The Rise of Early Modern Science: Islam, China and the West |date= 2003 |publisher= Cambridge University Press |isbn= 9780521529945 |page= [https://books.google.com/books?id=DA3fkX5wQMUC&pg=PA58 58]}}</ref>
<ref name="KirmaniSingh2005">{{cite book |last1= Kirmani |first1= M. Zaki |last2= Singh |first2= Nagendra Kr |title= Encyclopaedia of Islamic Science and Scientists: A-H |date= 2005 |publisher= Global Vision | isbn=9788182200586}}</ref>
<ref name= "JohansenRosenmeier1998">{{cite book |first1= K. F. |last1=Johansen |first2=  H. |last2= Rosenmeier |title= A History of Ancient Philosophy: From the Beginnings to Augustine |url= https://archive.org/details/historyancientph00joha |url-access= limited |date= 1998 |page= [https://archive.org/details/historyancientph00joha/page/n57 43]|publisher=Routledge |isbn=9780415127387 }}</ref>
<ref name= "Sarton1953">{{cite book |first= George |last= Sarton |title= Ancient Science Through the Golden Age of Greece |date= 1953 |page= 290}}</ref>
<ref name= "Eastwood1992">{{Cite journal |volume= 23 |pages= 233–260 |last= Eastwood |first= B. S. |title= Heraclides and heliocentrism – Texts diagrams and interpretations |journal= Journal for the History of Astronomy |date= 1992-11-01|issue= 4 |bibcode = 1992JHA....23..233E |doi= 10.1177/002182869202300401 |s2cid= 118643709 }}</ref>
<ref name="Lindberg2010">{{cite book |last= Lindberg |first= David C. |title= The Beginnings of Western Science: The European Scientific Tradition in Philosophical, Religious, and Institutional Context, Prehistory to A.D. 1450 |edition= 2nd |date= 2010 |publisher= University of Chicago Press |isbn= 9780226482040 |page= [https://books.google.com/books?id=dPUBAkIm2lUC&pg=PA197 197]}}</ref>
<ref name= "Russell1945">{{cite book |last= Russell |first= Bertrand |author-link= Bertrand Russell |title= A History of Western Philosophy |orig-year= 1945 |date= 2013 |publisher= Routledge |page= 215 |isbn= 9781134343676|title-link= A History of Western Philosophy }}</ref>
<ref name= "Finocchiaro2008">{{cite book |last= Finocchiaro |first= Maurice A. |title= The Essential Galileo |url= https://archive.org/details/essentialgalileo00gali |url-access= limited |location= Indianapolis, IL |publisher= Hackett  |date= 2008 |page= [https://archive.org/details/essentialgalileo00gali/page/n59 49]}}</ref>
<ref name= "Densmore2004">{{cite book |title= Selections from Newton's Principia |editor-first= Dana |editor-last= Densmore |publisher= Green Lion Press |date= 2004 |page= 12}}</ref>
<ref name= "Babinski1995">{{cite web |editor-last= Babinski |editor-first= E. T. |title=Excerpts from Frank Zindler's 'Report from the center of the universe' and 'Turtles all the way down' |url= http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/ce/2/part3.html |publisher= [[TalkOrigins Archive]] |date= 1995 |access-date= 2013-12-01}}</ref>
<ref name= "Graebner1902">{{cite journal |title= Science and the church |journal= Theological Quarterly |first= A. L. |last= Graebner |pages= [https://books.google.com/books?id=cxsRAAAAIAAJ&pg=PA37 37–45] |date= 1902 |publisher= Lutheran Synod of Missouri, Ohio and other states, Concordia Publishing |location= St. Louis, MO |volume= 6}}</ref>

<ref name= "Sefton2006">{{cite news |url= https://news.google.com/newspapers?id=_1kaAAAAIBAJ&dq=robert-sungenis&pg=6714%2C4991566 |title= In this world view, the sun revolves around the earth |first= Dru |last= Sefton |newspaper= [[Times-News (Hendersonville, North Carolina)|Times-News]] |location= Hendersonville, NC |date= 2006-03-30 |page= 5A}}</ref>
<ref name="Berman2006">{{cite book |last= Berman |first= Morris |author-link= Morris Berman |title= Dark Ages America: The Final Phase of Empire |date= 2006 |publisher= W.W. Norton & Company |isbn= 9780393058666 |url= https://archive.org/details/darkagesamericaf00berm }}</ref>
<ref name= "Crabtree1999">{{cite web |url= http://www.gallup.com/poll/3742/new-poll-gauges-americans-general-knowledge-levels.aspx |title= New Poll Gauges Americans' General Knowledge Levels |first= Steve |last= Crabtree |publisher= [[The Gallup Organization|Gallup]] |date= 1999-07-06}}</ref>
<ref name= "MillerBio">{{cite web |url= http://www.cmb.northwestern.edu/faculty/jon_miller.htm |title= Jon D. Miller |work= Northwestern University website |access-date= 2007-07-19}}</ref>
<ref name= "Dean2005">{{cite news |url= https://www.nytimes.com/2005/08/30/science/30profile.html?ex=1184990400&en=2fb126c3132f89ae&ei=5070 |title=Scientific savvy? In U.S., not much |first= Cornelia |last= Dean |date= 2005-08-30 |newspaper= New York Times |access-date= 2007-07-19}}</ref>
<ref name= "RussianStudy2011">{{citation |url= https://wciom.ru/index.php?id=236&uid=1749 |script-title=ru:'СОЛНЦЕ – СПУТНИК ЗЕМЛИ', ИЛИ РЕЙТИНГ НАУЧНЫХ ЗАБЛУЖДЕНИЙ РОССИЯН |trans-title='Sun-earth', or rating scientific fallacies of Russians |issue= Пресс–выпуск №1684 <nowiki>[</nowiki>Press release no. 1684<nowiki>]</nowiki> |date= 2011-02-08 |language= ru |publisher= ВЦИОМ <nowiki>[</nowiki>[[VTSIOM|All-Russian Center for the Study of Public Opinion]]<nowiki>]</nowiki> |postscript= .}}</ref>
<ref name="Finocchiaro1989">{{cite book |title= The Galileo Affair: A Documentary History |first= Maurice A. |last= Finocchiaro |location= Berkeley |publisher= University of California Press |date= 1989 |page= [https://archive.org/details/galileoaffair00uisi/page/307 307] |isbn= 9780520066625}}</ref>
<ref name= "Alexandri VII1664">{{cite book |title= Index librorum prohibitorum Alexandri VII |url= https://books.google.com/books?id=PSVCAAAAcAAJ |date= 1664 |publisher= Ex typographia Reurendae Camerae Apostolicae |location= Rome |language= la |page= v}}</ref>
<ref name="BenedictXV1921">{{cite web |url=https://www.vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xv/encyclicals/documents/hf_ben-xv_enc_30041921_in-praeclara-summorum_en.html |title=In Praeclara Summorum: Encyclical of Pope Benedict XV on Dante to Professors and Students of Literature and Learning in the Catholic World |date=1921-04-30 |location=Rome |page=§ 4 |no-pp=y |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20141109070054/https://www.vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xv/encyclicals/documents/hf_ben-xv_enc_30041921_in-praeclara-summorum_en.html |archive-date=2014-11-09 }}</ref>
<ref name="PaulIV19665">{{cite web|url=https://www.vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_cons_19651207_gaudium-et-spes_en.html |title=Pastoral Constitution on the Church in the Modern World 'Gaudium Et Spes' Promulgated by His Holiness, Pope Paul IV on December 7, 1965 |page=§ 36 |no-pp=y |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110411023509/https://www.vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_cons_19651207_gaudium-et-spes_en.html |archive-date=April 11, 2011 }}</ref>
<ref name= "John PaulII1992">{{cite journal |title= Faith can never conflict with reason |url= http://www.its.caltech.edu/~nmcenter/sci-cp/sci-9211.html |journal= L'Osservatore Romano |volume= 44 |issue= 1264 |date= 1992-11-04 |author= Pope John Paul II |access-date= 2012-10-18 |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20170202001221/http://www.its.caltech.edu/%7Enmcenter/sci-cp/sci-9211.html |archive-date= 2017-02-02 |url-status= dead }} (Published English translation).</ref>
<ref name="Nussbaum2007">{{cite magazine |url= http://www.skeptic.com/the_magazine/featured_articles/v12n03_orthodox_judaism_and_evolution.html |title= Orthodox Jews & science: An empirical study of their attitudes toward evolution, the fossil record, and modern geology |access-date= 2008-12-18 |last= Nussbaum |first= Alexander |date= 2007-12-19 |magazine= Skeptic Magazine}}</ref>
<ref name= "Nussbaum2002">{{cite journal |first= Alexander |last= Nussbaum |title= Creationism and geocentrism among Orthodox Jewish scientists |journal= Reports of the National Center for Science Education |date=January–April 2002 |pages= 38–43}}</ref>
<ref name="SchneersohnGotfryd2003">{{cite book |last1= Schneersohn |first1= Menachem Mendel |author-link1= Menachem Mendel Schneerson |last2= Gotfryd |first2= Arnie |title= Mind over Matter: The Lubavitcher Rebbe on Science, Technology and Medicine |pages= [https://books.google.com/books?id=FmabnhsgSVAC&pg=PA76 76ff.]; cf. xvi-xvii, [https://books.google.com/books?id=FmabnhsgSVAC&pg=PA69 69], [https://books.google.com/books?id=FmabnhsgSVAC&pg=PA100 100–1], [https://books.google.com/books?id=FmabnhsgSVAC&pg=PA171 171–2], [https://books.google.com/books?id=FmabnhsgSVAC&pg=PA408 408ff.] |date= 2003 |publisher= Shamir |isbn= 9789652930804}}</ref>
<ref name= "Mishneh Torah">{{cite book |title= Mishneh Torah |chapter-url= http://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/947929/jewish/Chapter-Eleven.htm |chapter= Sefer Zemanim: Kiddush HaChodesh: Chapter 11 |page=Halacha 13–14 |no-pp=y |translator=Touger, Eliyahu |publisher=Chabad-Lubavitch Media Center}}</ref>
<ref name= "Rabinowitz1987">{{cite web |url= https://sites.google.com/a/nyu.edu/avi-rabinowitz/science-and-religion/geocentrism--egocentrism-existentialist-despair-and-human-significance |first= Avi |last= Rabinowitz |date= 1987 |title= EgoCentrism and GeoCentrism; Human Significance and Existential Despair; Bible and Science; Fundamentalism and Skepticalism | work= Science & Religion | access-date=2013-12-01}} Published in {{cite book |editor1-last= Branover |editor1-first= Herman |editor2-last=Attia |editor2-first= Ilana Coven |title= Science in the Light of Torah: A B'Or Ha'Torah Reader |date= 1994 |publisher= Jason Aronson |isbn=9781568210346}}</ref>
<ref name= "Hort1822">{{cite book |first= William Jillard |last= Hort |title= A General View of the Sciences and Arts |url= https://archive.org/details/ageneralviewsci01hortgoog |date= 1822 |page= [https://archive.org/details/ageneralviewsci01hortgoog/page/n196 182]}}</ref>
<ref name="NSF2014">{{cite news| last=Neuman | first=Scott | date=February 14, 2014 | title = 1 In 4 Americans Thinks The Sun Goes Around The Earth, Survey Says | url=https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2014/02/14/277058739/1-in-4-americans-think-the-sun-goes-around-the-earth-survey-says| work=National Public Radio | access-date=May 24, 2020}}</ref>
}}

==Bibliography==
* {{cite book | title = Theories of the World from Antiquity to the Copernican Revolution | last = Crowe | first = Michael J. | publisher = Dover Publications | date = 1990 | location = Mineola, NY | isbn = 0486261735 | url-access = registration | url = https://archive.org/details/theoriesofworldf0000crow }}
* {{cite book | title= A History of Astronomy from Thales to Kepler | last= Dreyer |first= J.L.E. | publisher= Dover Publications | date= 1953 | url=https://archive.org/details/historyofplaneta00dreyuoft | location= New York | author-link= John Louis Emil Dreyer}}
* {{cite book |last= Evans |first= James |title= The History and Practice of Ancient Astronomy |location= New York |publisher= Oxford University Press |date= 1998}}
* {{Cite journal
| doi = 10.2307/1006444
| issn = 0065-9746
| volume = 74
| issue = 4
| pages = 1–69
| last = Grant
| first = Edward
| title = In Defense of the Earth's Centrality and Immobility: Scholastic Reaction to Copernicanism in the Seventeenth Century
| journal = Transactions of the American Philosophical Society
| series = New Series
| date = 1984-01-01
| jstor = 1006444
}}
* {{cite book |last= Heath |first= Thomas |author-link= T. L. Heath |title= Aristarchus of Samos |url= https://archive.org/details/aristarchusofsam0000heat |location= Oxford |publisher= Clarendon Press |date= 1913}}
* {{cite book |author-link= Sir Fred Hoyle |last= Hoyle |first= Fred |title= Nicolaus Copernicus |date= 1973}}
* {{cite book |author-link= Arthur Koestler |last= Koestler |first= Arthur |title= The Sleepwalkers: A History of Man's Changing Vision of the Universe |orig-year= 1959 |publisher= Penguin Books |date= 1986 |isbn= 014055212X}} 1990 reprint: {{ISBN|0140192468}}.
* {{cite book |author-link= Thomas Samuel Kuhn |last= Kuhn |first= Thomas S. |title= The Copernican Revolution |location= Cambridge |publisher= Harvard University Press |date= 1957 |isbn= 0674171039 |url= https://fpa2014.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/kuhn-thomas-s-the-copernican-revolution.pdf|oclc=1241666716}}
* {{cite book | title= From Eudoxus to Einstein—A History of Mathematical Astronomy | last= Linton |first= Christopher M. | publisher= Cambridge University Press | date= 2004 | location= Cambridge | isbn= 9780521827508}}
* {{cite book |last=Qadir |first=Asghar |title=Relativity: An introduction to the special theory |publisher=World Scientific | publication-place=Singapore Teaneck, NJ |year=1989 |isbn=9971-5-0612-2 |oclc=841809663}}
* {{cite book |editor-last= Walker |editor-first= Christopher |title= Astronomy Before the Telescope |location= London |publisher= British Museum Press |date= 1996 |isbn= 0714117463}}
* {{cite book |last=Wright |first=J. Edward |date=2000 |title=The Early History Of Heaven |publisher=Oxford University Press |url=https://archive.org/details/earlyhistoryheav00wrig_187 |url-access=limited}} [https://books.google.com/books?id=lKvMeMorNBEC Google Books]

==External links==
{{Wikiquote}}
{{Commons category}}
*[https://web.archive.org/web/20180901044431/http://www.astro.utoronto.ca/~zhu/ast210/geocentric.html Another demonstration of the complexity of observed orbits when assuming a geocentric model of the Solar System]
*[http://www.astronomy.ohio-state.edu/~pogge/Ast161/Movies/#ptolemaic Geocentric Perspective animation of the Solar System in 150AD]
*[https://web.archive.org/web/20071015162256/http://library.thinkquest.org/29033/history/ptolemy.htm Ptolemy’s system of astronomy] <!-- replaces commented-out links -->
*[http://galileo.rice.edu/sci/theories/ptolemaic_system.html The Galileo Project – Ptolemaic System]

{{Ethnocentrism}}
{{Ancient Greek astronomy}}
{{Indian astronomy}}
{{Astronomy in medieval Islam}}
{{Portal bar|Astronomy|Stars|Spaceflight|Outer space|Solar System}}
{{Authority control}}

[[Category:Ancient Greek astronomy]]
[[Category:Astronomical coordinate systems]]
[[Category:Scientific models]]
[[Category:Early scientific cosmologies]]
[[Category:Copernican Revolution]]